- Site: Winfrith
- IR number: 21-063
- Date: July 2021
- LC numbers: 6, 7, 8, 9
Executive summary
Purpose of Intervention
This inspection was to confirm that the Tradebe Inutec Ltd site is complying with various Licence Conditions (LC) identified below in accordance with the 2021/22 inspection plan and to confirm that the licensee is controlling its hazards and complying with its statutory obligations.
Interventions Carried Out by ONR
This inspection was to confirm adequate implementation of arrangements made under the following Licence Conditions:
- LC6 (Documents, records, authorities and certificates)
- LC7 (Incidents on the site)
- LC8 (Warning notices)
- LC9 (Instructions to persons on the site)
The inspection was based on examining a sample of the licensee’s arrangements, documentation and their implementation at the site. The inspection included a walkdown of the B48 facility, ISO storage area, and new operational area (currently under construction).
Explanation of Judgement if Safety System Not Judged to be Adequate
N/A
Key Findings, Inspector's Opinions and Reasons for Judgements Made
I examined the arrangements put in place by Tradebe Inutec Ltd to establish whether they were compliant with each of the licence conditions identified above.
The licensee was able to demonstrate from the facilities inspected; and the staff interviewed during the inspection, that it complied with the requirements of LC 6, 7 and 9. The sample consisted of review of the Tradebe Inutec arrangements, and their implementation on the site, including operational areas and office-based considerations as appropriate. Staff were interviewed on their knowledge of emergency arrangements, local hazards and pre job briefings. No significant matters were identified.
I concluded from inspection that the Tradebe Inutec arrangement P/218 covering warning notices (LC8) fell short of relevant good practice as the procedure did not identify any responsible person to manage compliance with its arrangements. Lack of ownership of the process manifested itself when examining implementation of those arrangements. I identified that there was no current schedule or drawings of warning notice locations as required by the licensee’s procedure and Tradebe Inutec could not demonstrate any form of periodic check to confirm the signs remained present, legible and relevant. I have therefore rated compliance with LC8 as “Amber” (seek improvement).
I provided feedback to the site on my inspection findings at a close-out meeting with Tradebe Inutec management representatives.
Conclusion of Intervention
Overall, I consider that Tradebe Inutec’s LC6, LC7 and LC9 arrangements and their associated implementation for the areas inspected met with relevant good practice. I did not identify any matters adversely affecting nuclear safety that required immediate regulatory action.
I consider the Tradebe Inutec arrangements for LC8 (warning signs) fall short of relevant good practice, and some requirements within them have not been implemented as written. I have therefore rated compliance with LC8 as “amber” (seek improvement) and raised a level 3 regulatory issue which will be followed up as part of routine ONR Inspector interactions with the licensee.